Validation of the Farsi version of the Suicide Ideation and Behavior Scale.

Ali Mehrabi, Azam Naghavi, Mohammad Ershad Afsharzada, Sören Friedrich, Thomas Forkmann, Heide Glaesmer, Tobias Teismann
Author Information
  1. Ali Mehrabi: Department of Psychology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
  2. Azam Naghavi: Department of Counseling, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
  3. Mohammad Ershad Afsharzada: Department of Counseling, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
  4. Sören Friedrich: Department of Psychology, Mental Health Research and Treatment Center, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
  5. Thomas Forkmann: Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany.
  6. Heide Glaesmer: Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
  7. Tobias Teismann: Department of Psychology, Mental Health Research and Treatment Center, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany.

Abstract

Objective: Suicide ideation and suicide attempts are prevalent in Farsi speaking populations. The present study aimed at validating the Farsi version of the Suicide Ideation and Behavior Scale (SIBS).
Methods: Reliability and validity of the Farsi version of the SIBS were established in a highly burdened Afghan student sample ( = 279). Internal consistency, convergent and discriminant validity were investigated, and confirmatory factor analysis was conducted.
Results: The Farsi version of the SIBS was shown to have a unidimensional structure with excellent internal consistency, as well as good convergent and divergent validity.
Discussion: The results suggest that the SIBS is a brief, reliable, and valid measure of current suicidal ideation and behavior that can be used in Farsi speaking populations.

Keywords

References

  1. Inj Epidemiol. 2022 Oct 6;9(1):31 [PMID: 36203184]
  2. Br J Psychiatry. 2017 Jun;210(6):387-395 [PMID: 28302700]
  3. Asian J Psychiatr. 2020 Jan;47:101856 [PMID: 31704597]
  4. BMJ Open. 2011 Jan 1;1(2):e000198 [PMID: 22021884]
  5. Lancet Glob Health. 2023 Apr;11(4):e497-e498 [PMID: 36863385]
  6. BMC Psychol. 2016 Feb 10;4:8 [PMID: 26865173]
  7. J Clin Psychol. 2015 Dec;71(12):1186-200 [PMID: 26287362]
  8. Psychol Assess. 2015 Jun;27(2):501-512 [PMID: 25496086]
  9. BMC Public Health. 2022 Apr 1;22(1):635 [PMID: 35365108]
  10. Psychometrika. 2010 Jun;75(2):243-248 [PMID: 20640194]
  11. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2018 Oct;48(5):531-543 [PMID: 28678380]
  12. Psychol Assess. 2021 Mar;33(3):218-229 [PMID: 33705163]
  13. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2005 Jun;35(3):309-16 [PMID: 16156491]
  14. Value Health. 2005 Mar-Apr;8(2):94-104 [PMID: 15804318]
  15. J Trauma Stress. 2015 Dec;28(6):489-98 [PMID: 26606250]
  16. Iran J Psychiatry. 2017 Jan;12(1):73-77 [PMID: 28496505]
  17. Assessment. 2001 Dec;8(4):443-54 [PMID: 11785588]
  18. Psychol Bull. 2017 Feb;143(2):187-232 [PMID: 27841450]
  19. Crisis. 2019 Jul;40(4):227-230 [PMID: 31274031]
  20. Behav Res Ther. 2002 Apr;40(4):471-81 [PMID: 12008659]
  21. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2018 Mar;53(3):279-288 [PMID: 29340781]
  22. Psychiatr Res Clin Pract. 2021 Summer;3(2):57-66 [PMID: 34414359]
  23. BMJ. 2023 Mar 13;380:561 [PMID: 36914177]
  24. J Affect Disord. 2022 Jun 15;307:178-183 [PMID: 35390352]
  25. Psychol Med. 2020 Feb;50(3):367-383 [PMID: 31907085]
  26. J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13 [PMID: 11556941]
  27. BMC Psychiatry. 2021 Sep 27;21(1):472 [PMID: 34579691]
  28. Lancet Psychiatry. 2022 May;9(5):342-343 [PMID: 35271817]
  29. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2023 Feb;53(1):16-28 [PMID: 36029097]
  30. J Affect Disord. 2007 Aug;101(1-3):27-34 [PMID: 17074395]
  31. Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2023 Oct-Dec;23(4):100398 [PMID: 37521503]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0FarsiversionSIBSSuicideideationsuicidevalidityattemptsspeakingpopulationsstudyIdeationBehaviorScaleconsistencyconvergentObjective:prevalentpresentaimedvalidatingMethods:ReliabilityestablishedhighlyburdenedAfghanstudentsample = 279InternaldiscriminantinvestigatedconfirmatoryfactoranalysisconductedResults:shownunidimensionalstructureexcellentinternalwellgooddivergentDiscussion:resultssuggestbriefreliablevalidmeasurecurrentsuicidalbehaviorcanusedValidationAfghanistanassessmentvalidation

Similar Articles

Cited By